From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 09:28:46 GMT
Subject: Re: GSoC 2016: applications open, deadline = Fri, 19/2
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.1602201027170.20796@bonsai2>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8u2gcubh.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Hi Junio,

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> The "experimenting" would include mergy operations like "am -3" and
> "cherry-pick".  "After queuing a topic and trying it in isolation, an
> attempt to merge to the baseline results in quite a mess, and I give
> up"--there is nothing to salvage.
> 
> And obviously, "stash" is not useful in such a situation.

I think this is more a short-coming of "stash" than anything else.

Many a times did I wish I could simply quickly stash a failed merge and
then come back later. Or not. Just like stashed changes without conflicts
allow me to do already.

Ciao,
Dscho